Announcements

Fluid forum view allows members only to get right to the meat of this community; the topics. You can toggle between your preferred forum view just below to the left on the main forum entrance. You will see three icons. Try them out and see what you prefer.
Fluid view allows you, if you are a signed up member, to see the newest topic posts in either all forums (select none or all) or in just your favorite forums (select the ones you want to see when you come to Fishing Minnesota). It keeps and in real time with respect to Topic posts and lets YOU SELECT YOUR FAVORITE FORUMS. It can make things fun and easy. This is especially true for less experienced visitors raised on social media. If you, as a members want more specific topics, you can even select a single forum to view.
Let us take a look at fluid view in action. We will then break it down and explain how it works in more detail.
The video shows the topic list and the forum filter box. As you can see, it is easy to change the topic list by changing the selected forums. This view replaces the traditional list of categories and forums.
Of course, members only can change the view to better suit your way of browsing.
You will notice a “grid” option. We have moved the grid forum theme setting into the main forum settings. This makes it an option for members only to choose.
This screenshot also shows the removal of the forum breadcrumb in fluid view mode. Fluid view remembers your last forum selection so you don’t lose your place when you go back to the listing.
The benefit of this feature is easy to see. It removes a potential barrier of entry for members only. It puts the spotlight on topics themselves, and not the hierarchical forum structure. You as a member will enjoy viewing many forums at once and switching between them without leaving the page.
We hope that fluid view, the new functionality is an asset that you enjoy .

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I think they should do away with the entire thing. Go ahead and name the best players (which is debatable also) to some imaginary list and leave it at that. I cant even remember the last time I watched one of these games.

Share on other sites

PFF's unique accuracy percentage is different than traditional completion percentage. It counts dropped passes as accurate attempts and excludes throwaways, spikes, passes batted at the line and released while being hit. As a result, accuracy percentage is typically much higher than completion percentage.

OMG, is this from the Onion?

You can't be serious, right? excluding throwaways and passes batted down at the line? Maybe a better QB doesn't have to throw the ball away so much? Maybe a better QB finds throwing lanes and doesn't have the ball batted down as many times.

It's pretty bad when you have to invent new statistics to make your guy look better. What about QB rating? I thought that was the one everyone wanted to measure QBs by? Theodore is 22nd in that one.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The pro bowl is a joke and always was. The only reason they keep it is because people actually watch it for some reason, thus it's revenue for the NFL. I have never watched it. At that stage i'm more interested in the coming draft and free agents and the next season with Dave and Lmit bashing Teddy and the VIkings show good luck.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I've read some of those articles stating Teddy is the most accurate passer. I honestly don't think it means much other than gives the stat guys something to do. If you eliminate certain negative things (throw aways and batted passes) you might get a more favorable stat but in reality you can't dismiss those two things. During a game they count and impact the game so they should be factored in.

Teddy has a low release point which likely creates some of his batted passes so removing that stat is removing one of his weaknesses. Same thing for some of this throw aways, he tends to hold the ball too long forcing him to throw it away. Those weakness should be factored in when evaluating a QB.

Sam Bradford Puts Teddy Bridgewater On the Trade Block

For a moment in time it looked like the Minnesota Vikings might have a quarterback controversy developing on their roster.

Sam Bradford finished 2016 strong, completing over 70% of his passes. This was made interesting by the accelerated return of Teddy Bridgewater from his catastrophic knee injury last year. Rumors persist he’s regaining his old form in practice. It remained to be seen whether Bradford might open the door for him to get the starting job back. On Monday night against the Saints, it feels like that door shut.

Granted New Orleans isn’t exactly the greatest measuring stick given their history of putrid defensive play. Nonetheless Bradford has picked up right where he left off. Barring a huge meltdown in the coming weeks, it looks like that job belongs to him. Permanently. Thus the Vikings are faced with a curious decision. What do they do about Bridgewater?

He is now in the final year of his rookie contract. The knee injury prevented them from exercising his 5th year option so they could control him for anther. This put Minnesota in a tricky spot. Do they try to hang onto him with the franchise tag? Do they let him walk as a free agent or do they try to trade him? That last part sounds like something Rick Spielman would definitely try to explore.

Bridgewater is still young and there’s no reason to think he can’t be effective provided that knee is close to 100%. One would think there’s a team in the league that would be willing to chance it, provided the price is reasonable. Given how desperate teams are for quarterbacks these days, there’s no reason to think the Vikings can’t get a decent pick back for him prior to the trade deadline this November.

Keep it in mind, especially if Bradford continues to play well.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Really no easy or obvious decision here. Bradford played well last season for the most part and he had 1 good game to start this season but he's also entering the 2nd half of his career. Do you invest in him and hope to get 5-6 more years out of him assuming he can play well until 34-35 years old? Or do you let him walk and go with the younger QB that can hopefully come back from injury and be around for the next 10+ years?

The trouble with Teddy is that he's such an unknown right now. Its not like he was a complete stud before the injury. He showed some talent but still needed to take a few more steps to be considered a franchise QB. Add in the fact that you really don't know how he'll come back from the injury he's a huge question mark. I'm not sure what teams would be willing to give up in a trade for him. He may come back and pick up right where he left off and progress into a franchise player, he may recover just enough to get back on the field but never progress and then live out his career as an average at best QB, or he may never play again. Maybe you'd get a mid round pick for him only because there are a few desperate teams that might be willing to make a foolish gamble. I could also see teams not wanting to go anywhere near that risk.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Some Qb's play until they are 40, not all of them and how many of them are running around and playing at a high level on 2 surgically repaired ACLs at 40?

You really think a team will give up a 1st round pick for an unproven QB coming off a catastrophic knee injury? I'm unaware of any player or QB coming back from an injury like Teddy's, its far worse than a torn ACL. The only teams desperate enough to giveaway a first round pick for a high risk player like that are going to be horrible/desperate teams which are likely going to be drafting very high in the first round, odds are they'd rather use that pick to draft a younger player, that they'll have control of for 4-5 years at a relatively low price, and who isn't trying to come back from a possible career ending injury. If you can con a team out of a first round pick under those circumstance then of course there is no question, you trade Teddy in a heartbeat and then you give Spielman a lifetime contract.

I'm guessing a trade for Teddy is going to involve something more like a late round draft pick considering the high risk and the fact that the Vikings have no leverage. The only way I see the offer going higher is if you can somehow find 2 desperate teams competing to see who can make the dumber trade offer.

That brings up the question. Is it better to keep Teddy around as a backup (assuming he's willing to sign) and insurance against another Bradford ACL injury and hopeful future replacement to Bradford, or would you rather have that 5th round pick you might get from Teddy and hope Bradford can hold up for 5-10 more years? Keeping in mind Bradford has only been slightly above average during his career. I'm still not sold that he's going to be the player we saw on Monday over the long haul.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Teddy won't be traded this year, teams will need to see him play to get value for him. His contract will toll, so we have him next year for cheap. Given that the Vikings haven't had a QB start 2 full seasons in a row in over 20 years, the likelihood Teddy plays for us again (should he be cleared to play) is going to be pretty high.

Posts

Go to the menu screen if you can and you can use a flashlight and shine it into the screen and look close to see if you can see any video. If you can then the backlight LED's quit working and your video bd is good. If you cannot see anything the video bd may not working or possibly it isn't receiving power from the power supply. I had a bad solder joint on the connection between the LED driver and power supply. The whole connector wiggled through the bd from bad soldering. I touched up the solder joints with a soldering pencil and it has not blanked out since. My TV is a Vizio 55. Most likely you can find parts on hsolist. Good info on how to fix HD TV's on youtube.

The viewpoints would be a lot "different" but that doesn't necessarily mean it would be "better." The military must think a volunteer force is better than mandatory enlistment, or it would probably go back to its old way of doing things.

Probably a bad board that was discontinued the month you bought the TV and no replacements are available because a million other people had the same problem. I have had 2 Samsung plasma screen televisions go out in similar matter. Fortunately i had a replacement warranty from Best Buy that replaced the first one and when the second one went out within a year they refunded my money and i went LG. I believe it was a power supply board that was the issue with mine. MY brother in law had the same TV and the video board went out in his but luckily i was able to swap the video board out of my defective television and his is still working. Keep in mind this is when a 42"-50" television was $2,000 so a guy can understand the frustration when you only got 16 months out of it.

If you find a deal use whatever you saved to buy/make an extended run tank. Things are worth their weight in gold. Nothing better than ripping the starter cord once and never having to worry about it the rest of the weekend. Delchcchi made a good point as well about having a place locally who is able to do warranty work. Honda's notoriously are well built and I've never had a problem with mine but you never know.

To this day, even though i had grand parents fight in it, i pretty much have no idea what the Korean war was really about. All i know is that it was to stop communism from spreading.
I have the utmost respect for the people that fought for this country and from what i have seen of the Vietnam series I cannot imagine what that hell must have been like for both sides. I believe a big part of the decay of patriotism in the US lately is due to the fact that a majority of Americans in my age group, including myself (born in '78), have not served in the military . In the 50's and 60's young men were drafted into the war just like their fathers, uncles, and grandfathers were before them. I am pretty sure if we would have a law that made it mandatory to serve at least a year or two in the armed forces the viewpoints would be a lot different concerning the recent protests.